City of Billings v. Albert

Summary

The Supreme Court of Montana affirmed Charles Eugene Albert's convictions for two violations of the Billings Municipal City Code involving storage of salvage. The court held that the ordinance was not unconstitutionally vague as applied, that Albert was not denied effective assistance of counsel, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, and that his suspended sentence and cleanup condition were legal.

Holdings

1. BMCC 27-601(g) was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to Albert because the ordinance, read together with its definitions, gave sufficient notice of the prohibited conduct and supplied adequate enforcement guidelines.
2. Albert was not denied effective assistance of counsel because he failed to establish either deficient performance or a reasonable probability that a different trial strategy would have produced an acquittal.
3. The evidence was sufficient to support both convictions because a rational jury could find that the offending items remained on Albert's property for more than five days.
4. The sentences were legal because the condition requiring Albert to clean up his property to the satisfaction of the City Code Enforcement Division was a reasonable condition of suspended sentences and was sufficiently understood in context.

Questions Presented

1. Whether BMCC 27-601(g), prohibiting permanent open storage of salvage, inoperable vehicles, rubbish, or other chattel, was unconstitutionally vague as applied to Albert.
2. Whether Albert received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel presented no defense case, did not call Albert to testify, and did not file pretrial constitutional motions.
3. Whether sufficient evidence supported Albert's convictions for storage of salvage.
4. Whether the conditions attached to Albert's suspended sentences rendered the sentences illegal.

Disposition

affirmed